Not all trans women athletes
Peter Tatchell got a “readers added context” on a dishonest tweet he dropped a few hours ago.
There is no ban on trans athletes, the note says. The tweet is an intentional lie, the note says.
Tip Jar
Peter Tatchell got a “readers added context” on a dishonest tweet he dropped a few hours ago.
There is no ban on trans athletes, the note says. The tweet is an intentional lie, the note says.
“individual assessment”
Yeah, how does that work? Like in racing where horses carry extra weights to meet the minimum weight assigned to them for a specific race? Are all athletes going to be put through a full body MRI before each event to see who has the bigger heart and lungs and densest muscles in what areas of the body? Are the men claiming to be women going to be allowed to gasp and struggle and act weak during the “assessment” to claim they have no advantage?
Just stop with all this garbage. No men in women’s sports, never, no way, the end.
“Individual assessment” means the continuation of officially sanctioned cheating, but with just a few fewer cheaters. Many sports federations are still doing this, allowing some cheating, fucking over fairness to women in the name of a bogus “inclusivity.” This isn’t stripping anyone of their rights. There is no “right” to cheat. There is no “right” to compete and win in the division of the other sex. This is a restoration of fairness and justice for women. BECAUSE WOMEN ARE WORTH IT GODDAMMIT! For Tatchell and those like him, women aren’t worth it. That is what they are saying each and every time they whine about “inclusivity,” when they demand to take women’s places away from them, evicting them from their own spaces and sports. “What’s yours is ours and we’ll take it whenever we choose, and you’ll congratulate us from the shorter podium with the number 2 on it. Or else.”
“Not all
trans womentrans identified male athletes have an unfair advantage.” Yes, but they are male. No trans identified male is a woman. See how plain, honest language cuts through the bullshit? NOT WOMEN = NOT ALLOWED IN WOMEN’S SPORTS. Fuck off and grow up, but mostly just fuck off.Peter Tatchell has been waxing hysterical about imaginary consequences for many, many years. Around the time that Section 28 came into force in spring 1988, I attended a conference in London where we discussed the implications of the new law for lesbian and gay activism. Tatchell was one of the platform speakers and treated us to an inane rant to the effect that as a result of this legislation lesbian and gay activists would be sent to jail, but we must persist nonetheless and eventually we would prevail.
This was alarmist rubbish. Section 28 forbade local authorities to ‘intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality’, and (in a remarkable piece of word salad) to ‘promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship’. No one was going to be jailed. The practical effects on LG activism involved the withdrawal of modest amounts of resources for specific projects made available by a very few local authorities. But apparently that was not dramatic enough for Tatchell. Or maybe he just hadn’t bothered to check up on what was actually happening.
“Not all trans women athletes ….”
Gee, what does that remind me of?
Oh, yeah,
“Not all men ….”
Same as ever. Rather than listening to women, or considering the issue from women’s point of view, these apologists focus on the interests of men. New patriarchy, just like the old patriarchy: the hell with what women say, or want, or need. Men matter; women don’t.